Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

the finished iron casting here in question is not excluded from paragraph 147 by reason of the qualifying phrase “but not made up into articles.” The protest is sustained and reliquidation directed at the rate of 0.8 of 1 cent per pound plus 0.2 of 1 cent per pound under paragraph 147, act of 1909. (T. D. 31624.)

Cast-iron statuary-Castings.-T, D. 31426, paragraph 199.
Mantel and friezes not castings.-T. D. 31566, T. D. 32227, paragraph 199.

PARAGRAPH 148.

No. 27904. Malleable-iron castings.Protest 576477 of F. B. Vandegrift & Co. (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. The articles under protest were castings of malleable iron fitted to serve as ends of spools used to wind material on in carpet mills, no labor or manufacture having been bestowed upon them subsequent to the casting process. They were classified as manufactures of metal under paragraph 199, tariff act of 1909, and held dutiable as malleable-iron castings (par. 148), as claimed by the importers. (T. D. 32314.)

Galvanized date nails- Malleable-iron castings.-T. D. 32506, paragraph 199.

PARAGRAPH 149.

Imitation bronze statuury.--T. D. 32203, T. D. 31866, paragraph 199.

PARAGRAPH 151. No. 29691. Blanco boxes-- Usual coverings.- Protests 587309, etc., of C. M. Moseman & Bro. et al. (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Zinc boxes used as containers for “Blanco," assessed under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, held dutiable as usual containers under subsection 18 of section 28. United States v. Garramone (2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 30; T. D. 31577) followed. (T. D. 32812.)

Circular zinc boxes—Blanco.—Circular zinc boxes used as the containers of "blanco” not dutiable under paragraph 151, but as usual containers under subsection_18 of section 28, tariff act of 1909. Treasury Department, November 27, 1911. (T. D. 32042.)

Coverings.-(1) Cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels-Iron drums. The provision in paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, for "cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels, for holding gas, liquids, or other material, whether full or empty," does not apply to usual and necessary coverings which arrive merely as an incident to the importation of their contents, but is intended to cover vessels, such as gas tanks, storage cylinders, etc., designed for other purposes than the bona fide transportation of their contents. (2) Coverings—Iron drūms containing glycerin. Iron drums, the usual and ordinary coverings or containers used in the shipment of glycerin, are not dutiable under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, but are free of duty as usual and necessary containers for goods subject to specific duties. United States General Appraisers, New York, May 28, 1910. (T. D. 30644; G. A. 7027.)

No. 29241. Coverings--Cylindrical metal vessels. -- Protest 582290 of Frank H. Shallus (Baltimore); Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Cod-liver oil was imported in wooden casks lined with thín sheet metal in the form of drums. The metal lining, which was assessed for duty under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, held entitled to free entry as the usual coverings of merchandise subject to specific duty. Abstract 26485 (T. D. 31851) followed. (T. D. 32681.)

Cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels. The provision in paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, for cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels, not limited to vessels composed of iron or steel exclusively, but includes those composed of copper or other metal. Treasury Department, December 29, 1909. (T. D. 30229.)

No. 24821. Cylindrical tins.--Protests 433926, etc., of F. A. Garramone et al. (New York).

Hay, General Appraiser: These protests relate to cylindrical tins imported filled with tomato sauce and tomato paste. The tins were included in the dutiable value of their contents and assessed at 40 per cent ad valorem. They are claimed to be within the meaning of the proviso of paragraph 151 which relates to cylindrical and tubular tins or vessels, whether full or empty, dutiable at only 30 per cent. Following the reasoning in the case of United States v. Marx & Rawolle (T. D. 31210), we find that the tins in question come fully within the following language of paragraph 151:

“Par. 151. * Cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels, for holding gas, liquids, or other material, whether full or empty, thirty per centum ad valorem

*

*

They are therefore dutiable under this provision. The protests are sustained and
the collector is directed to reliquidate the entries accordingly. (T. D. 31300.)

Secondhand iron drums.-Colby & Co. v. United States (No. 877). Cylindrical or

tubular tanks or vessels. Paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, imposes a duty upon

cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels for holding gas, liquids, or other material,

whether full or empty. This duty is laid upon containers and not upon the things

contained, and this regardless of whether the contents bear specific duties or are

free of duty.--Merritt v. Stephani (108 U.S., 106); United States v. Braun (2 Ct. Cust.

Appls., 57; T. D. 31596) distinguished. United States Court of Customs Appeals,

May 8, 1912. (T. D. 32512.)

No. 26116. Iron drumsCylindrical vessels.- Protest 450327, etc., of Balfour Guthrie

& Co. et al. (San Francisco).

FISCHER, General Appraiser: In these cases the importations consist of caustic pot-

ash and bleaching powder imported in thin sheet metal drums. No question is
raised as to the classification of the contents of the drums, and it is urged that the
drums, as the usual containers of goods, whether free or liable to specific duty, are
entitled to free entry. The collector assessed the metal coverings with duty at the
rate of 30 per cent ad valorem under that part of paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909,
relating to cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels, for holding gas, liquids, or other
material, whether full or empty." In the Garramone case (T. 1). 31577) and in the
Braun case (T. D. 31596) it was held that the ruling in the Marx & Rawolle case (T. D.
31210) did not apply to the usual coverings or containers of merchandise designed
merely to transport the same and useless after the contents are removed. The evi-
dence in these cases shows that the metal drums used in holding caustic potash and
bleaching powder on being emptied of their contents can not be used commercially,
for any similar use and possess no value other than as scrap metal. The decisions of
the collector are reversed and the claims in the protests sustained. (T. D. 31757.)

No. 24882. Metal cans-Cylindrical vessels.- Protests 424343, etc., of Goldschmidt
Thermit Co. (New York). Cslindrical cans made of sheet iron or steel and imported
empty were claimed to be dutiable under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, as "cyl-
indrical

* vessels."
FISCHER, General Appraiser:

The appraiser has reported that the articles

are cylindrical receptacles or cans for holding powder or other material, and an ex-

amination of the samples in evidence confirms this description. The said articles are

used as containers for thermit in welding and other work. It would appear to us

that such articles are classifiable as claimed, under paragraph 151, and that claim in

the protests is sustained in each case. (T. D. 31335.)

Cylindrical iron drums.-United States v. Braun Chemical Co. (No. 561). Cylin-

drical iron drums containing chemical salts. Where the containers are cylindrical

iron drums that it is necessary to cut into two parts in order to remove their contents,

and when so cut in two appear to have no value and do not enter into or become a part

of the merchandise of this country for any purpose whatever, they are not dutiable

under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, as cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels for

containing purposes and separately from their contents, but rather as usual con-

tainers possessing no value apart from their contents, and their value should be assessed

along with the contained merchandise at ad valorem rates under paragraph 3, pur-

suant to the provisions of subsection 18, section 28, tariff act of 1909. Ünited States

v. Marx & Rawolle (T. D., 31210) distinguished. United States Court of Customs

Appeals, May 10, 1911. (T. D. 31596.)

No. 26754. Cylindrical metal containers.—Protests 420281, etc., of Hammill &

Gillespie (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Sheet-metal drums containing
chloride of magnesium, classified as cylindrical or tubular vessels under paragraph 151,
tariff act of 1909, were claimed to be dutiable at the rate applicable to their contents.
Protests sustained on the authority of United States v. Braun (T. D. 31596). (T. D.
31899.)

No. 26776. Cylindrical metal containers.- Protests 422265, etc., of E. J. Dupont de
Nemours Powder Co. et al. (Wilmington, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and New York).
Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Iron drums containing crude glycerin, classified as cyl-
indrical or tubular vessels under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, were claimed to be the
usual containers of merchandise subject to specific duty and therefore nondutiable.
Protests overruled. United States v. Marx (1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 152; T. D. 31210)
followed. (T. D. 31912.)

No. 28882. Cylindrical metal vessels.--- Protests 554840, etc., of W. H. Stiner & Son
(New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Metal flasks, bottles, or coverings of
quicksilver, assessed under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, held not to be free of duty as usual coverings of merchandise subject to specific duty. (T. D. 32645.)

Iron containers.-Marx & Rawolle et al. v. United States (No. 791). Iron drums containing glycerin. These articles clearly fall within the letter of paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909. They are “cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels,” they are made and presently used for holding gas, liquids, or other material," and they are "full" when imported. After they have been emptied of their contents, some are used again in the transportation of crude or refined glycerin and some are sold in competition with similar articles in the domestic market. They are dutiable under paragraph 151. United States v. Marx (1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 152; T. D. 31210). United States Court of Customs Appeals, March 20, 1912. (T. D. 32359.)

Flexible tubing:-Hensel v. United States (No. 529). Seamless flexible copper tubing Generally speaking, pipe” implies an article tubular in form and rigid, while "tubing” implies an article that is flexible. Paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, provides in precise language for flexible metal tubing or hose, and this being a more specific, definite enumeration than "copper pipes," the importation was dutiable not under paragraph 176 of that act, but under paragraph 151. United States Court of Customs Appeals, October 12, 1911. (T. D. 31951.)

Iron drums.--United States v. Marx (No. 256). Iron drums—“Tanks or vessels" containing glycerin. Reviewing in full the history of legislation affecting these containeis, cylindrical iron drums used in commerce to convey glycerin are held dutiable under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909. United States Court of Customs Appeals, January 7, 1911. (T. D. 31210.)

Philosophic and scientific apparatus.-- United States v. Wyman & Co. (No. 755). Iron cylinder containing liquid sulphurous acid. The evidence shows beyond question that the tank and contents were ordered by the purchasing agent of the University of Kansas. Whether the tank, though a usual covering, would be free of duty as such under paragraph 151, tariff act of 1909, query; but paragraph 650 of the act applies. In the broader terms employed in paragraph 650, relative to apparatus for the use of institutions of learning, there appears to be a purpose to encourage institutions of the kind, and the paragraph must receive a reasonably liberal interpretation. The cylinder here was indispensable in keeping its contents in the safe and proper way to make these contents available for scientific instruction; it must be deemed scientific apparatus, and as such free of duty. United States Court of Customs Appeals, January 11, 1912. (T. D. 32200.)

Tins containing tomato sauce and paste: --Cylindrical tins used as the containers of tomato sauce and paste should be included in the value of the contents for dutiable purposes. Treasury Department, May 4, 1911. (T. D. 31556.)

Vegetable tins.-United States v. Garramone (No. 636). (1) "Cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels" defined. It would seem “cylindrical or tubular tanks or vessels.” appearing in paragraph 151, section 1, tariff act of 1909, must be taken to refer to containers made in part at least of metal and of such strong and permanent construction that on being emptied of their contents they might properly be devoted to further similar use and possessing appreciable value for such purposes. (2) Vegetables imported in tin containers. In view of the legislative history of the clause and its judicial interpretation, and in view of the common significance of the language employed, the cylindrical containers as described in paragraph 151, section 1, tariff act of 1909, can not be taken to remove small tin cans with contents of tomatoes and of tomato sauce from the operation of subsection 18 of section 28 of that act, though these tins are cylindrical in shape and they were dutiable ad valorem under said subsection 18.- United States v. Marx & Rawolle (T. D. 31210). United States Court of Customs Appeals, May 10, 1911. (T. D. 31577.)

Collapsible metal tubes.-T. D. 32714, paragraph 151.
Metal boxes, cylindrical, lithographed.—T. D. 31473, paragraph 195.

PARAGRAPH 152.

No. 26615. Combination knife- and letter opener.- Protests 431381, etc., of A. L. Silberstein (New York).

FISCHER, General Appraiser: The merchandise consists of metal articles in the form of a letter opener and knife combined. Duty was assessed on the goods at the rate of 1 cent each and 40 per cent ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 152, tarifi act of 1909, for “knives, by whatever name known, including such as are denomi

natively mentioned in this section, which have folding or other than fixed blades or attachments." It is claimed that the articles are dutiable at 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 199 of said act as manufactures of metal not specially provided for. The metal article, as represented by the exhibits, is a combination one with handle in the form of a knife with folding blade and a fixed attachment in the form of a letter opener. The importers say it is a letter opener with a knife attachment; the Gov. ernment that it is a knife with a letter-opener attachment. It is fair to regard the article as a desk knife and letter opener. It is a combination article. The provision for “all knives by whatever name known," paragraph 152, must cover the goods here before us, for the wording refers to such as have other than fixed blades or attachments." We regard the said provision as embracive of all knives with folding blades whether or not they are likewise supplied with fixed blades or attachments. That is, the provision would exclude such as have only fixed blades or attachments, but includes such as have “other” than fixed blades or attachments. We affirm the collector's assessments herein and overrule the protests. (T. D. 31866.)

Combination knives and forks.--Combination knives and forks dutiable under paragraph 152, tariff act of August 5, 1909. Treasury Department, December 6, 1911. (T. D. 32061.)

Erasers.--- Erasers-Knives with folding blades. The provision for “erasers” in paragraph 152, tariff act of 1909, is not to be limited to such as have "folding or other than fixed blades or attachments," but includes “erasers” which have fixed metal blades set into handles of wood or other material. United States General Appraisers, New York, February 11, 1911. (T. D. 31294; G. A. 7165.)

Metal erasers.-Irwin & Co. v. United States (No. 638). (1) Construction. According to the strict rules of grammatical and legal construction and in the absence of restraining considerations, a modifying clause following a number of recitals applies to its immediate antecedent and not to all those antecedents; but (2) erasers of metal with fixed blades. The legislative history of paragraph 152, tariff act of 1909, seems to show that the additional provision inserted therein, the basis of contention here, was intended to enlarge the class, make it more comprehensive, not less so; and erasers of metal with fixed or rigid blades set into handles of wood or other material are dutiable under that paragraph. United States Court of Customs Appeals, November 22, 1911. (T. D. 32039.)

No. 28981. Erasers- Manicuring knives.- Protests 567489, etc., of J. A. Henckels et al. (New York). Opinions by Fischer, G. A. Erasers and manicuring knives held to have been properly classified under paragraph 152, tariff act of 1909. Irwin v. United States (2 Čt. Čust. Appls., 296; T. D. 32039) followed. (T. D. 32655.)

Knives.-Silberstein v. United States (No. 777). Combination knife and letter opener. It is true that a strip of metal, suitable for opening envelopes, that has been riveted to the handle of a knife, makes of this something other than the ordinary penknife. It remains, however, a knife, with folding or other than fixed blades or attachments. The merchandise was properly assessed under paragraph 152, tariff act of 1909. United States Court of Customs Appeals, May 17, 1912. (T. D. 32562.)

No. 26552. Penknives-Carpenters' pencils--Ornamental belts.- Protests 43947834279, etc., of Marshall Field & Co. (Chicago). Penknives, with silver handles and carpenters' pencils inclosed in silver or brass holders, classified as articles of personal adornment under paragraph 448, tariff act of 1909, were held dutiable as penknives (par. 152) and manufactures of metal (par. 199), as claimed by the importers. G. A. 7129 (T. D. 31089) followed. Finished ornamental belts classified as articles of personal adornment (par. 448) were claimed to be dutiable as embroidered cotton wearing apparel (par. 349). Protests overruled. (T. D. 31866.)

No. 24111. Pocketknives.- Protest 411197–32031 of Wells-Fargo & Co. (Chicago). Opinion by Sharretts, G. A. Pocketknives with gun-metal handles, classified under paragraph 448, tariff act of 1909, were held dutiable under paragraph 152, relating to knives. G. A. 7102 (T. D. 30942) followed. (T. D. 31029.)

No. 22824. Razor handles.- Protest 385789 of Schnefel Bros. (Newark). Articles classified as handles for razors under paragraph 152, tariff act of 1909, were claimed to be dutiable as unenumerated manufactures under paragraph 480. Protest overruled.

Fischer, General Appraiser: The merchandise consists of handles for corn razors. They are about 3 inches in length, made of gallilith, and except as to size resemble those used to hold and inclose the razor blade for shaving. * The importers contend that the articles are to be used solely in the manufacture of pedicure implements; that they are not such as are generally known as razor handles.

81762–13–35

*

*

*

It might be of interest to compare that part of paragraph 152 under which the goods were classified with the corresponding provision in the old tariff act.

1909. That blades (except for safety razors), handles, and unfinished razors shall pay no less duty than that imposed on finished razors valued at $2 per dozen.

1897. Razor and razor blades, finished or unfinished, valued at

While the present tariff act subjects the handles for razors to a specified rate of duty, the previous act had no specific provision for such articles, and classification accordingly was either as a manufacture of the material of which composed, or as a nonenumerated manufactured article. The provision in paragraph 152 provides a rate of duty on handles for razors, and, whether they are composed of gallilith or any other material, they would appear to fall within that provision. It is plain that the only question in the case now before us is whether the articles are fact handles for razors. It is urged in behalf of the importers that a corn razor is not a razor, and that, therefore, the handle is not the handle of a razor. It is conceded that finished articles of the kind here in question are called corn razors, and we can find no proof in the record that they are not in fact razors. In G. A. 2686 (T. D. 15160), the Board passed on corn razors, about 8 inches long from the end of the blade to the end of the handle, and held such articles dutiable under the provisions for razors. That ruling was made in July, 1894, and appears to have been followed without change since that time. We know of no reason to warrant a departure from it now, and we hold the merchandise dutiable as “handles” for razors. (T. D. 30410.)

Corn knives— Manicure knives.-T. D. 31335, paragraph 199.
Hair clippers.-T. D. 31657, paragraph 199.
Ivory scales for razor handles.-T. D. 32822, paragraph 464.

PARAGRAPH 153.

[ocr errors]

Bayonets.--American Express Co. et al. v. United States (No. 672), Bayonets are side arms. A bayonet when in use is affixed to a gun, but is not to be considered a part of the gun. The lexicons uniformly define "bayonets as side arms. As such, they were dutiable under paragraph 154, tariff act of 1897, and are dutiable under paragraph 153, tariff act of 1909. United States Court of Customs Appeals, November 22, 1911. (T. D. 32049; also T. D. 31477.)

Bone swords.— The amendment to the tariff provision for "swords” and “side arms" contained in the tariff act of 1909, paragraph 153, plainly indicates an intention to embrace therein all swords or side arms made in part of metal, irrespective of quality or use, and swords or side arms with metal blades, and handles and scabbards of bone are dutiable thereunder, notwithstanding that they may be intended only for use as curios or ornaments. United States General Appraisers, New York, September 26, 1912. (T. D. 32841; G. A. 7394.)

No. 29398. Side arms.-Of A. Kastor & Bros. (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Small daggers with leather sheaths held dutiable as side arms under paragraph 153. American Express Co. ?. United States (2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 312; T. D. 32049) followed. Protests sustained in part. (T. D. 32751.)

PARAGRAPH 154.

*

*

Forks with handles-One-piece forks.---The provision in paragraph 154, tariff act of 1909, for “knives, forks, and steels, finished or unfinished; if imported with handles of *

other metal than iron or steel," is not to be limited to such finished articles as have handles added thereto, but includes as well a fork in which the handle and tines are made of one piece. United States General Appraisers, New York, April 4, 1910. (T. D. 30488; G. A. 7002.)

No. 29398. Hunting and carving knives. ---Of A. Kastor & Bros. (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Certain hunting knives and carvers held dutiable at 1 cent each and 15 per cent ad valorem but not less than 40 per cent ad valorem, as claimed, under paragraph 154, tariff act of 1909. American Express Co. v. United States (2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 312, T. D. 32049) followed. Protests sustained in part. (T. D. 32751.)

No. 29399. Table knives.--- Protest 426310 of Belknap Hardware & Manufacturing Co. (Louisville). Opinion by Fischer, G. A. Table knives having handles of iron or steel over which a thin sheet or shell of celluloid is laid, held to have been properly classified as knives with handles of celluloid or pyroxylin under paragraph 154 tariif act of 1909. (T. D. 32751.)

a

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »